Jonah's kidney

[Hitcher]

I'm not an anti-vivisectionist, but I do believe that the medical profession is at least 200 years ahead technologically of it's ethical stance. Prolonging life at any cost is not a noble goal, particularly when the method is effectively death by inches with decreasing levels of dignity. Transplant technology, radiotherapy, chemotherapy are all hugely experimental in nature, and for every success story there are at least 2 disasters.

Thanks to the efforts of the anti-GE brigade, the single biggest advance in medical technology, the growth and harvesting of internal organs using your own DNA, has been placed out of reach for the forseeable future.

The deification of the medical model has resulted in a "common wisdom" that refuses to question whether or not a particular procedure is valid, and has even allowed the "sanctity" of life to be enshrined in law, removing personal or family choice from the equation. The recent failed bid to force families to allow organs to harvested from brain dead, but still functioning relatives would tend to indicate that less people support transplant medicine than "common wisdom" would have a us believe.

One of the most common causes of kidney nephrosis is repeatedly not treating urinary tract infections. If this is the case, those people or their parents if the condition harkens from childhood, should be required to pay for the transplant procedure. I do not expect a heart transplant to bail me out of my years of eating fast food, pies, and cream doughnuts.

Hmmm, some good food for thought here.

I agree completely with your thesis on quality vs quantity of life, but this is a highly subjective and emotional area, and one where I hope that legislators avoid the temptation to intervene! The advance of medical technology doesn't help some of the emerging ethical dilemmas -- because you can do something, should you? But I disagree about where I think you're heading about paying the ultimate price for your own health (or lack of).

I also agree completely with your call on the anti-GE brigade, not just their flat-earth, paranoid, unscientific and blinkered approach to medical developments but also to crop science and food production. Surely production systems that do not rely on herbicides, pesticides and artificial fertiliser and which allow greater quantities of more nuturitious food to be grown on less land must be a good idea? Particularly when there is no environmental or human health risk??

[jrandom]

Surely production systems that do not rely on herbicides, pesticides and artificial fertiliser and which allow greater quantities of more nuturitious food to be grown on less land must be a good idea? Particularly when there is no environmental or human health risk??

Hah! You'll be laughing on the other side of your face when the giant killer tomatoes smash their way through the door, eat all the Tim Tams, ravish Mrs Hitcher and steal the ZRX.

The question of the existence or not of environmental or health risks is a valid one, and should be answered with due attention to impartiality and the scientific method.

Unfortunately, the results of that process are likely to follow the rule that applies to most things scientific, which is that 95% of everything that gets published is crap.

Now, I'm not sure I like the idea of small farming concerns attempting to reach profitability in Africa and central Asia whilst being beholden to Monsanto et al for their seasonal supply of hardy but non-reproductive seed stocks at a monopoly-decided price, yada yada. But that has nothing to do with whether the science and technology involved in direct genetic modification is a good idea.

Since I know nothing about it, I will not make a pronouncement upon its merits. But I don't believe in all that Frankenstein rubbish about there being things that mortal man was never meant to wot of.

[Hitcher]

Hah! You'll be laughing on the other side of your face when the giant killer tomatoes smash their way through the door, eat all the Tim Tams, ravish Mrs Hitcher and steal the ZRX.

It is a well known scientific fact that giant killer tomatos only ride Harleys.

[jrandom]

It is a well known scientific fact that giant killer tomatos only ride Harleys.

Well, I've always said that the big tomatoes have less taste.

[James Deuce]

No!! Not the Tim Tams!!

[Paul in NZ]

It is a well known scientific fact that giant killer tomatos only ride Harleys.

Jeeze!.. Don't mix yer veges wiv yer fruits. How many times must I tell you, Harleys go potatoe potatoe NOT tomato tomato (unless they make them in mexico)

Tomatos are a fruit and thus ride scooters... Admittedly, giant killer tomatos ride giant killer tomatos, but scooters all the same...

Paul N

[jrandom]

How many times must I tell you, Harleys go potatoe potatoe NOT tomato tomato

I'll have you know, matey, that around here, Harleys go 'kumara kumara'.

[Paul in NZ]

I'll have you know, matey, that around here, Harleys go 'kumara kumara'.

Mate.... I've been to west awklund... Out there, Harleys go in about 30 minutes from where you parked it last...

Paul N

[James Deuce]

But what about the Tim Tams???

[jrandom]

But what about the Tim Tams???

They don't go well with kumara.

[Motu]

The Day of the Triffids is nigh! Potatoes and tomatoes are related - fruit or vegetable,kinda a moot point if you ride a Harley.

Back to the subject - one of my best friends son rejected his mother's kidney last year...he's just a 20 something guy,wrote off a 250 Kawasaki,got a Subby,cute girl friend,has aged his parents 20 years with the stress....damn,life is just so unfair at times eh?

[Paul in NZ]

....damn,life is just so unfair at times eh?

Yeah.... Too True.... But it's still a shit load better than the alternative...

Paul N

[NC]

People give you money for a kidney ...

Wooohooo!

[Back Fire]

I've already lost enough bits through operations so I think I'm going to hang to what I have left